Re: Dr. Amy Holmes on Mercury Chelation for Autism

July 18, 2001

Am I looking at the wrong thing? I used your link and it brought me to info

from 1/15/01. I know it's been update at least twice since then...as of

April, at the DAN Conference and then again as of June something. It's now

about 800 patients and with some good results.

In a message dated 7/18/2001 4:20:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

moriam@... writes:

<< hey, everybody,

This update to Dr. Amy's site is very interesting stuff.

For everyone who wants to know " the percentages " or

chances of success, there is actually a chart with

percentages, broken down by age, and based on the

results seen with Amy's patients. The chart is here:

http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm#results

The results are (sadly) fairly mixed. And her chart

says very clearly that older kids don't do as well

as younger kids. At least given the givens in this

situation, with current treatments.

If anyone is listening from Dr. Amy's office: thank

you very much!

Moria

At 08:23 AM 7/18/2001 -0000, you wrote:

>A recent update and complete bibliography is now available at:

>

>http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm

>

>Also, a new section on vaccines (including autism and mercury

>toxicity

>issues):

>

>http://www.healing-arts.org/children/vaccines/

>

> >>

July 18, 2001

hey, everybody,

This update to Dr. Amy's site is very interesting stuff.

For everyone who wants to know " the percentages " or

chances of success, there is actually a chart with

percentages, broken down by age, and based on the

results seen with Amy's patients. The chart is here:

http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm#results

The results are (sadly) fairly mixed. And her chart

says very clearly that older kids don't do as well

as younger kids. At least given the givens in this

situation, with current treatments.

If anyone is listening from Dr. Amy's office: thank

you very much!

Moria

At 08:23 AM 7/18/2001 -0000, you wrote:

>A recent update and complete bibliography is now available at:

>

>http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm

>

>Also, a new section on vaccines (including autism and mercury

>toxicity

>issues):

>

>http://www.healing-arts.org/children/vaccines/

>

>=======================================================

>

July 18, 2001

Oh, well, I guess I don't know. I haven't looked at Dr. Amy's site

in a while, and I don't think there was anything with " results "

like this before. When you say " its been updated " do you mean

her website has been updated? Was this chart already there?

Moria

At 04:33 PM 7/18/2001 EDT, you wrote:

>Am I looking at the wrong thing? I used your link and it brought me to info

>from 1/15/01. I know it's been update at least twice since then...as of

>April, at the DAN Conference and then again as of June something. It's now

>about 800 patients and with some good results.

>

>In a message dated 7/18/2001 4:20:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

>moriam@... writes:

>

><< hey, everybody,

>

> This update to Dr. Amy's site is very interesting stuff.

> For everyone who wants to know " the percentages " or

> chances of success, there is actually a chart with

> percentages, broken down by age, and based on the

> results seen with Amy's patients. The chart is here:

> http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm#results

>

> The results are (sadly) fairly mixed. And her chart

> says very clearly that older kids don't do as well

> as younger kids. At least given the givens in this

> situation, with current treatments.

>

> If anyone is listening from Dr. Amy's office: thank

> you very much!

>

> Moria

>

> At 08:23 AM 7/18/2001 -0000, you wrote:

> >A recent update and complete bibliography is now available at:

> >

> >http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm

> >

> >Also, a new section on vaccines (including autism and mercury

> >toxicity

> >issues):

> >

> >http://www.healing-arts.org/children/vaccines/

> >

> > >>

>

>=======================================================

>

July 18, 2001

Doesn't she suggest the 8 hour dose schedule? If so, could that explain

the results found on the chart?

Carmen

Moria Merriweather wrote:

> hey, everybody,

>

> This update to Dr. Amy's site is very interesting stuff.

> For everyone who wants to know " the percentages " or

> chances of success, there is actually a chart with

> percentages, broken down by age, and based on the

> results seen with Amy's patients. The chart is here:

> http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm#results

>

> The results are (sadly) fairly mixed. And her chart

> says very clearly that older kids don't do as well

> as younger kids. At least given the givens in this

> situation, with current treatments.

>

> If anyone is listening from Dr. Amy's office: thank

> you very much!

>

> Moria

>

July 19, 2001

At 04:13 PM 7/18/2001 -0600, you wrote:

>Doesn't she suggest the 8 hour dose schedule? If so, could that explain

>the results found on the chart?

>

>Carmen

yes, she does recommend 8 hour dose schedule. That's a good point.

No way to tell how it would change the data if she recommended

3/4 hour dosing. Also no way to tell how many of the parents

of the kids in the chart DID use 3/4 hour dosing.

Anyway, this seems closer to " hard data " than anything else

I recall seeing.

Moria

p.s. I am aware that Dr. Amy is okay with parents using 3/4 hour

dosing if they wish to.

July 19, 2001

Moria:

I think it will be interesting when those of us with older kids (mine is 8)

have been through lengthy periods of chelation. Many of Dr. Amy's patients

have been at it less than a year. We're just starting to see some positive

stuff after moving on to phase II (ALA). During stage I (DMSA only) we

experienced plenty of ups and downs. Anecdotally those of us with older kids

are seeing change - it's just taking longer and is perhaps more subtle.

Joyce

Re: [ ] Dr. Amy Holmes on Mercury Chelation for Autism

> >as Dr, Holmes stated at the DAN Conference, she's seeing good results

with

> >the younger children so far, but she feels that it may just take longer

for

> >the older kids to show any major improvements since the metals are more

> >tightly bound within the body. Her results at the DAN were from 6 months

of

> >treatment.

> >

>

> Hi ,

>

> The results that are cited in the chart on her website are

> from patients explained as follows:

> " As of 1/15/01, we had 85 patients who had

> finished DMSA alone and had completed at least 4 months of DMSA +

> lipoic acid. The results of

> treatment in these patients are presented below: "

>

> This sounds like maybe it is slightly different than the

> data presented at DAN conference? The above description

> of the stats is very helpful. It is enough info to be able

> to put the data in some context that is useful.

>

> I'm belaboring this not because there is any contention

> about it, but because it is so relevant. This is the

> only data of this kind I know of --- and people ask for

> this sort of data *all the time*. To me it seems worth

> paying attention to details like when (in the treatment)

> the stats were taken. (Since it says " at least 4 months

> of DMSA " , the length of time could vary a lot.)

>

> It certainly will be very interesting to see later results

> (in another year?) if Dr. Amy decides to continue to share

> such data in the future.

>

> Again, if anyone is listening from Dr. Amy's office: thank

> you!

>

> Moria

>

> =======================================================

>

July 19, 2001

>

> > hey, everybody,

> >

> > This update to Dr. Amy's site is very interesting stuff.

> > For everyone who wants to know " the percentages " or

> > chances of success, there is actually a chart with

> > percentages, broken down by age, and based on the

> > results seen with Amy's patients. The chart is here:

> > http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm#results

> >

> > The results are (sadly) fairly mixed. And her chart

> > says very clearly that older kids don't do as well

> > as younger kids. At least given the givens in this

> > situation, with current treatments.

> >

> > If anyone is listening from Dr. Amy's office: thank

> > you very much!

> >

> > Moria

> >

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have b

July 19, 2001

In a message dated 7/19/2001 6:50:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

cln3181@... writes:

<< The results are (sadly) fairly mixed. And her chart

> says very clearly that older kids don't do as well

> as younger kids. At least given the givens in this

> situation, with current treatments. >>

as Dr, Holmes stated at the DAN Conference, she's seeing good results with

the younger children so far, but she feels that it may just take longer for

the older kids to show any major improvements since the metals are more

tightly bound within the body. Her results at the DAN were from 6 months of

treatment.

July 19, 2001

It was in the hand outs at the DAN Conference and I saw an update posted

somewhere. I'll have to research and let you know.

In a message dated 7/19/2001 4:15:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

moriam@... writes:

<< Oh, well, I guess I don't know. I haven't looked at Dr. Amy's site

in a while, and I don't think there was anything with " results "

like this before. When you say " its been updated " do you mean

her website has been updated? Was this chart already there?

Moria

At 04:33 PM 7/18/2001 EDT, you wrote:

>Am I looking at the wrong thing? I used your link and it brought me to

info

>from 1/15/01. I know it's been update at least twice since then...as of

>April, at the DAN Conference and then again as of June something. It's

now

>about 800 patients and with some good results.

>

>In a message dated 7/18/2001 4:20:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

>moriam@... writes:

>

><< hey, everybody,

>

> This update to Dr. Amy's site is very interesting stuff.

> For everyone who wants to know " the percentages " or

> chances of success, there is actually a chart with

> percentages, broken down by age, and based on the

> results seen with Amy's patients. The chart is here:

> http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm#results

>

> The results are (sadly) fairly mixed. And her chart

> says very clearly that older kids don't do as well

> as younger kids. At least given the givens in this

> situation, with current treatments.

>

> If anyone is listening from Dr. Amy's office: thank

> you very much!

>

> Moria

> >>

July 19, 2001

In a message dated 7/19/2001 10:31:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

moriam@... writes:

<< on't worry about it unless you want to.

Since you saw the data at the DAN conference it would

make sense it might look less --um-- new. I think I'm

seeing it for the first time. (I say " I think " because

my memory is not the greatest.)

>>

I mean that there is new updated data as of June, not just reposted January

info. I'm gonna find it and send to list

July 19, 2001

>as Dr, Holmes stated at the DAN Conference, she's seeing good results with

>the younger children so far, but she feels that it may just take longer for

>the older kids to show any major improvements since the metals are more

>tightly bound within the body. Her results at the DAN were from 6 months of

>treatment.

>

Hi ,

The results that are cited in the chart on her website are

from patients explained as follows:

" As of 1/15/01, we had 85 patients who had

finished DMSA alone and had completed at least 4 months of DMSA +

lipoic acid. The results of

treatment in these patients are presented below: "

This sounds like maybe it is slightly different than the

data presented at DAN conference? The above description

of the stats is very helpful. It is enough info to be able

to put the data in some context that is useful.

I'm belaboring this not because there is any contention

about it, but because it is so relevant. This is the

only data of this kind I know of --- and people ask for

this sort of data *all the time*. To me it seems worth

paying attention to details like when (in the treatment)

the stats were taken. (Since it says " at least 4 months

of DMSA " , the length of time could vary a lot.)

It certainly will be very interesting to see later results

(in another year?) if Dr. Amy decides to continue to share

such data in the future.

Again, if anyone is listening from Dr. Amy's office: thank

you!

Moria

July 19, 2001

At 08:41 AM 7/19/2001 EDT, you wrote:

>It was in the hand outs at the DAN Conference and I saw an update posted

>somewhere. I'll have to research and let you know.

>

Don't worry about it unless you want to.

Since you saw the data at the DAN conference it would

make sense it might look less --um-- new. I think I'm

seeing it for the first time. (I say " I think " because

my memory is not the greatest.)

It's quite wonderful that Dr. Amy has now published this

in a public location.

Moria

July 19, 2001

You really have to be careful in interpreting the age versus improvement data

presented by Dr. Holmes. First of all with an illness like autism with

unselected patients, these are amazing results. But remember for younger,

non-speaking children (ages 1-5) there is about a 25 % remission rate with no

medical treatment. This makes the results with older children more

significant because these children were apparently also non-verbal at the

beginning of treatment. Hence they were not in the 25 % group which remits

with no treatment and were presumably somewhat treatment resistant having

probably failed a number of other treatments. Obtaining moderate to marked

improvement in 50% of these children between ages 6-12 with chelation is

remarkable and may represent rates of improvement comparable to the youngest

children if those who might have improved with little or no medical therapy

(ex. ABA alone) were removed.

The only other data I would like to see is whether some of these children

improved on DMSA alone without using ALA. Also I would like to see the

results of urine tests documenting that mercury was being removed in all of

these cases so that the results are due to mercury removal and not some other

changes in the gut. If these results are true, they surpass those of any

other known treatment for this condition. Unfortunately, in order to be

scientific, the analyzed cases should not be receiving any other significant

therapy and should be evaluated by a neuropsychologist familiar with testing

autistic children before and after treatment. I hope this will be written up

and published to make others aware of a significant treatment.

Sokolski, M.D.

July 19, 2001

> as Dr, Holmes stated at the DAN Conference, she's seeing good results with

> the younger children so far, but she feels that it may just take longer

for

> the older kids to show any major improvements since the metals are more

> tightly bound within the body. Her results at the DAN were from 6 months

of

> treatment.

Yes, and when my pediatrician called Dr. Holmes this spring, she told him

that a child the age and size of my son (11 1/2 and 140 lbs.) might take

two or three years to be chelated.

Lorilyn

July 20, 2001

In a message dated 7/19/01 5:32:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

moriam@... writes:

> p.s. I am aware that Dr. Amy is okay with parents using 3/4 hour

> dosing if they wish to.

>

Dr. Holmes did tell us that she's seeing that the younger kids do MUCH better

on the 4 hour dosing and suggested we do 3 on 11 off every 4 hours. We are

doing 3 on 4 off instead with great results and she said to stick with that.

Jo (South Carolina)

July 20, 2001

> In a message dated 7/19/01 5:32:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> moriam@e... writes:

>

> > p.s. I am aware that Dr. Amy is okay with parents using 3/4 hour

> > dosing if they wish to.

> >

> Dr. Holmes did tell us that she's seeing that the younger kids do

MUCH better

> on the 4 hour dosing and suggested we do 3 on 11 off every 4 hours.

We are

> doing 3 on 4 off instead with great results and she said to stick

with that.

THIS is interesting. Am I unreasonable to infer from this that the

younger kids are simply having more obvious adverse reactions to the

every 8 hour protocol, and thus that the young children for whom there

is great progress are mostly on every 4 hour, and the older ones for

whom there is little progress are mostly on every 8 hour?

>

> Jo (South Carolina)

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been r

July 20, 2001

>

> THIS is interesting. Am I unreasonable to infer from this that

the

> younger kids are simply having more obvious adverse

reactions to the

> every 8 hour protocol, and thus that the young children for

whom there

> is great progress are mostly on every 4 hour, and the older

ones for

> whom there is little progress are mostly on every 8 hour?

>

> >

No can't infer that from our experience. Mike did the every 4 hour

protocol for a couple of months before we did the every 8 hour

protocol and we saw the same amount of improvements both

ways. Actually according to urine/feces analysis we actually saw

more mercury exiting his system with the 8 hour protocol.

However, I think you could mostly attribute that to the fact that

DMSA seems to get some of the other metals first before you

start seeing a good amount of mercury. Either way, we didn't

see anymore improvements on every 4 than we have seen on

every 8 ------the same for both protocols.

Sharon

Baton Rouge

July 20, 2001

OK...I've been lurking again...and I missed the original post, I guess! Can

anyone tell me where I can see these results from Dr. Holmes WITHOUT having

to search the archives!??

Thanks a bunch!

July 22, 2001

Here is what is published on Dr Amy's site:

http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm#results

Here is even more current data which posted.

From info presented at DAN conference:

/message/28958

I'd suggest you read both.

Moria

At 09:05 PM 7/20/2001 EDT, you wrote:

>OK...I've been lurking again...and I missed the original post, I guess! Can

>anyone tell me where I can see these results from Dr. Holmes WITHOUT having

>to search the archives!??

>Thanks a bunch!

>

July 23, 2001

To Andy and others:

For whatever it is worth, I personally spoke with Dr. Amy at the ASA

conference this past Friday in San Diego and asked her what was up with the

big 4hr. vs. 8 hr. protocol. She asked me how old my son was, I said four and

she said she would definately do 4 hr dosing. She said she has been seeing

much better results in the younger children (5 and under) using the four hour

protocol. As a parent I just thank God for people like Andy and Dr. Amy who

are will to go the extra mile and help us try and get these kids to be the

best they can be. Im grateful!

Luke's Mom

July 23, 2001

> To Andy and others:

> For whatever it is worth, I personally spoke with Dr. Amy at the ASA

> conference this past Friday in San Diego and asked her what was up

with the

> big 4hr. vs. 8 hr. protocol. She asked me how old my son was, I said

four and

> she said she would definately do 4 hr dosing. She said she has been

seeing

> much better results in the younger children (5 and under) using the

four hour

> protocol.

This certainly suggests trying it in the older ones too.

>As a parent I just thank God for people like Andy and Dr. Amy who

> are will to go the extra mile and help us try and get these kids to

be the

> best they can be. Im grateful!

> Luke's Mom

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been rem

July 23, 2001

Hey Andy,

Just a little personal note here--- since I'm editing the FAQ,

I actually have to read parts of it occassionally and I

noticed there is a quote from Amy where she implies that

steady blood level is definatly needed. Here is the quote:

Dr. Amy Holmes: " Cilantro. Untested. A few reports that it MAY cross the

blood-brain barrier and chelate mercury, but

no data. Please bear in mind that no one knows what the ingredient in

cilantro is that MAY do this. Is every cilantro equal?

Who knows? I don't see how one could possibly be even somewhat sure that

you are keeping a relatively steady blood

level of THE INGREDIENT when we don't know what THE INGREDIENT is or if all

cilantro has the same amount of it.

And if anything in mercury chelation is more important, I can't think of it. "

You could quote her on this or refer to the quote (in the FAQ) if you

wanted to point to the inconsistency.. Please don't say I said so,

however, I really don't have any animosity for Dr Amy of any sort.

I just thought this was interesting in light of the things you

have said about her changing her policies.

And, it sounds like she is coming back around to 4 hrs now.

Moria

July 23, 2001

-Get ready.....and yes, I'm ready for the flame...let it rip!!

Moria,

You have stated that you are 43 years old and chelating yourself for

amalgom mercury. Trust me, a child on the autism spectrum is NOTHING

LIKE YOU...or Andy!!! They have a multitute of problems that you

can't even imagine. It is VERY dificult to find a good, understanding

Doctor to treat these children. Many of us feel we have found that in

Dr. Amy Holmes. It is not just chelation!!!! The day you or Andy

spend all day, everyday, working with these children and parents, is

the day you have a right to knock and dicect every word and thought

that has ever been written.(I could pick some real winners from some

that you have wrote) Dr. Holmes has NOT changed her mind about 4 hour

dosing. She goes by the child and their test results...ALL the kids

are getting better and for that we are eternally grateful. She spend

endless hours speaking, writing, e-mailing, reviewing test, answering

questions on and on. What other dr. do you know that you can e-

mail!!! What are you doing for the kids???? You have a right to an

opinion, but it does not have to continue to be distructive. If you

can't lift people up on this site, get out of the way!!!

This FAQ has been on their forever...it's not some

secret...information has been gathered, children have been chelated,

comparasions have been made by a group of DAN dr's that are trying to

put ALL the pieces of the autism puzzle together. You are not

helping .

Cilantro is an unknown.....Chemet/DMSA is a known. And the 4 hour 8

hour question is up to the parents and their doctor. It's one thing

to mention it...it is another to drone on and on when people are

capable of deciding this question for themselves.

" Don't say I said so " ...geeeezzzz And her policy has NOT changed.

Ann

a grammy to:

dean/4 3/4 4 hour (although he did fine on 8 and is going back to it)

/13 3/11 8 hour and always has been and after 8 months is

90% " normal " 100% of the time.

BOTH patients of Dr.Amy Holmes

Let the flames fly.......

-- In @y..., Moria Merriweather <moriam@e...> wrote:

> Hey Andy,

>

> Just a little personal note here--- since I'm editing the FAQ,

> I actually have to read parts of it occassionally and I

> noticed there is a quote from Amy where she implies that

> steady blood level is definatly needed. Here is the quote:

>

> Dr. Amy Holmes: " Cilantro. Untested. A few reports that it MAY

cross the

> blood-brain barrier and chelate mercury, but

> no data. Please bear in mind that no one knows what the ingredient

in

> cilantro is that MAY do this. Is every cilantro equal?

> Who knows? I don't see how one could possibly be even somewhat sure

that

> you are keeping a relatively steady blood

> level of THE INGREDIENT when we don't know what THE INGREDIENT is

or if all

> cilantro has the same amount of it.

> And if anything in mercury chelation is more important, I can't

think of it. "

>

> You could quote her on this or refer to the quote (in the FAQ) if

you

> wanted to point to the inconsistency.. Please don't say I said so,

> however, I really don't have any animosity for Dr Amy of any sort.

>

> I just thought this was interesting in light of the things you

> have said about her changing her policies.

>

> And, it sounds like she is coming back around to 4 hrs now.

>

> Moria

July 23, 2001

Just to clarify, (but trying not to add more variables) when doing

ALA & DMSA every 3 hours(as we are), are we considered to be the 4

hour protocol? When Dr. Amy's patients do a 4 hour protocol with ALA

is it still typically 4 hours, or reduced to 3? We had juggled 3

hours of ALA and 4 hours of DMSA for a few weeks, but went back to 3

hours for both about a month ago. What are other people doing?

We found Dr. Amy's data from January on her website, and the later

data from 5/30/01 to be very inspirational! Our 8 year old daughter

has had (slow?) steady improvement over the past year, which we

considered to be moderate, but by the standards posted would be

considered minimal although still very significant!

Joe Marciano

> > To Andy and others:

> > For whatever it is worth, I personally spoke with Dr. Amy at the

ASA

> > conference this past Friday in San Diego and asked her what was

up

> with the

> > big 4hr. vs. 8 hr. protocol. She asked me how old my son was, I

said

> four and

> > she said she would definately do 4 hr dosing. She said she has

been

> seeing

> > much better results in the younger children (5 and under) using

the

> four hour

> > protocol.

>

This certainly suggests trying it in the older ones too.

> >As a parent I just thank God for people like Andy and Dr. Amy who

> > are will to go the extra mile and help us try and get these kids

to

> be the

> > best they can be. Im grateful!

> > Luke's Mom

July 23, 2001

Dear Moria and all,

I agree with Ann 100% and have very little I can add to her

articulate post except to say that Dr. Holmes feels my children

are getting a pretty steady bloodstream of DMSA on the 8 hour

protocol so she HAS NOT changed her mind that some kids can

and will do ok on every 8 hour. She also believes many can and

do better on every 4 hour. She works with each parent/child and

that decision. I see no need to rehash this point over and over

and over again!!!!!!!!!!!

I see Moria in your followup you never intended this for the list so

in fairness you probably didn't want to rehash this point again.

But, Ann also makes some very valid points about the way Dr.

Amy is treated on this list. As I always have said....feel free to

discuss the pro's and con's of all protocol's - that is valid

discusson - but this constant slamming of Dr. Amy is not valid

considering that she is in the trenches with these kids and one

of the few doctor's out there willing to help our children. Autism

is very complicated and she is putting the time and effort into

searching for answers and tweaking her protocol as she learns

Sign In

Re: Dr. Amy Holmes on Mercury Chelation for Autism

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Activity